The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1887-02-27

and in determining the cred1Dllity of the
witnesses and the weight of the testimony
pearance OF the witnesses upon the stand
their apparent candor or the want of can.
dor, their interest in the outcome of the
case their relation to the parties Interested
in any way. and all the tacts aud circum-
stances surrounding the witnesses; you arr
not bound to believe the testimony of any
witness or of any number ofWitnesses; Won
are to search for the truth, believing ONLY
such testimony as carries conviction to youc
minds of its truth. The defendant is pre-
sumed 70 be innocent until he is shown to
be guilty beyond reasonable doubt"
Section Thirty of the Code of Civil Pro-
cedure laws Of Utah 1884, p. 12o) provides
that the Court in the charge, may state
the testimony, and declare the law, and in
each case he shall inform the jury that they
are the sole judges of the credibility of the
witnesses, of the weight of the evidence and
of the facts" The part of the charge above
quoted is but the statement OF the sub
stance of this statute, and the deduc
tons resulting from tits colollary.
There was conflict in the testimony of the
witnesses as to the m aterial facts In view
of such evidence the charge was given. I'm
mediately after using the language objected
to, the court told the jury that in searching
for truth, they should rely only on such ties
timOny as they should believe to be true
Fhe court did not in effect tell them tha
IuGN ulSIG3dIu Uuc StdlCluCAIo VI
cOntradicted witnesses; the evidence die
not present that question. The evidence a.
to the material facts was conflicting anC
contradictory. We find no error in the rec
ord sufficient to reverse the judgment or the
court below and in view of the conclusions
above reached we do not deem 1t necessary
to decide other points discussed. The Judg
ment of the court below is affirmed.
FOREMAN, Justice cOncurs.
H. P. HENDERSON, justice, concurs.
Notice of an appeal was given.
THE CANNON BOND CASE.
In the case of the United States, re-
spondent, VS.. Horace S. Eldredge anC
Francis Armstrong, appellants, one o.
the suits brought to recover the amount
of the bonds required of George Q
Cannon at the time of the latter'S ar
rest in FEBRUARY last, Boreman, Justice
delivered the opinion of the court. Il
will be remembered that Mr.. Cannon
was compelled to give bonds on two
charges of unlawful cohabitation, in
S10,0 900 each, and Messrs. Eldredge and
Armstrong signed both. 1t is the bond
guaranteeing the appearance of the de-
PENDANT to answer to the segregated
count between March, 1885, aud July
1885, that was before the court. There
Is still another case to come.up-involv
ing the same am unit. The decision
overrules every point raised by the de-
tense, and afirms the judgment of the
court below, Zane, Chief Justice, and
Henderson, Justice, both concurring.
Mr.. Young gave rotice of an appea
to the Supreme Court of the United
States.
Egan VS.. Clasbey; decision of lower
court affirmed.
Armstrong VS.. Broom; decision of
lower court affirmed; an appeal asked
for; taken under adviSement.
Lashus VS.. Chamberlain; petition for
rehearing denied; appeal allowed.
Thackrah VS.. Haas; judgment of Su-
preme Court of Utah revoked on man
date from the Supreme Court of the
United States and case remanded to the
Third District.
Street VS.. Ferry; allowance of appea
to Supreme Court vacated and remitti-
tur ordered; motion to stay execution
in the Third District overruled.
Conrt adjourned until Thursday even
ing at 7.30.